Working for You

Abstract

Marilyn W. Edmunds PhD, NP Publishing today is a pretty sophisticated process. Our publisher, Elsevier, is one of the largest publishers of medical journals in the world, with 2320 journals. All their journals use the same electronic editorial system (EES) to manage submission and review of articles. Authors upload their articles into the system through a website, from which the editor can quickly contact reviewers. EES saves all communications among authors, editors, and reviewers. The electronic system moves quickly — immeasurably speeding up the time from submitting an article to publication so that more current information comes to readers. The only delays in this process come when reviewers fail to return their comments promptly and when authors spend a long time making revisions. Currently, the average time from acceptance of an article to publication in JNP is 3 to 6 months — a relatively short time compared to many journals. Having an electronic system allows the publisher to track specifically both the process and outcome of all articles submitted. For 2008, the system shows that we received 106 manuscripts. Of the 106, 3 were returned to the authors before review, 70 were accepted, 19 were rejected, and 14 are still out for revision. These statistics do not show the vast numbers of authors discouraged by the editor from submitting an article after sending a query letter. Many articles are rejected before submission because of an inappropriate or duplicated topic, focus on non-NPs (nurse practitioners), commercial funding, or the query letter itself is filled with poor grammar, spelling, or construction. Thus, the initial triage of articles is often the harshest part of the review process. Statistics also do not show the number of revisions needed to achieve a publishable article. In the first-reviewer evaluation of the 2008 articles, 16.3% were rejected outright, while 70.2% were returned to the authors for revision. Then, 26.3% of revised articles were returned a second time for revision, and 13.3% of articles required a third round of revision before they could be published. Thus, a rejection rate of 18% represents those articles that we did not believe we could salvage even with hard work. The revision statistics also do not describe the number of articles that die when they are returned to authors for revision. Some authors choose not to make the effort to rewrite their work. Because we are a relatively new journal, JNP editors have taken time to work with prospective authors to achieve publishable papers. As our submission numbers increase, the ability to work so closely with authors will likely decline. We will be looking for an increase in really well-crafted articles that arrive in pristine condition, and our rejection rate undoubtedly will increase. We appreciate all the support and cooperation from authors and reviewers that have allowed JNP to grow every year. We take seriously our responsibility to give accurate and timely information that informs your practice as NPs.